Similar age, had the account, but only recently started having an interest in Chess, I never thought I'd get the enjoyment I do from it, but other hobbies have been retired. A lot of people want to improve at something, but if they lose all enjoyment in that pursuit, they just end up losing.
It's not about playing chess.com. touch some grass and play real tournaments(chess.com tournaments dont count). get a USCF or FIDE account
Well... You were in a GothamChess video... I suppose if Levi puts you in such high regard... I have no choice but to say you're probably correct and that I wish I had that honor.
@cogadhtintreach
If somebody like you is one of the best players in your country at the age of 14 it's shame for that county.
No need to insult him or his country, I don't understand the animosity...
Just study and train calculation half time and play 15 min games and longer the other half and you will gradually improve. It takes time.
@cogadhtintreach
I've seen many noobs like you. They always say that they are only xteen and they will be GMs very soon . And, almost always they can't even break 2000 at blitz.
You're NOT 1900. You're 1500 at best! And most likely even lower than that. Chess.com rapid ratings on lower levels are VERY-VERY inflated.
I never said that blitz is "real chess". Of course you should play longer time controls if you want to improve. But blitz ratings a better to estimate skill of a player. Blitz ratings are closer to reality.
If you think I'm dumping your "real level" then try to play a few OTB tournaments and you'll see that even 1500 is exaggeration.
If 1900 online i would imagine more than 1500 otb
No need to argue, Appreciate the response from EviLOverMind, it's interesting to see what I should try to aim for in the eyes of someone who is that high rated, and plays OTB. You're both much better players than me, as for overtaking EviL, why talk? It's cheap, I don't doubt you, if it happens it will happen.
Personally I like how blunt he is, appreciate the insight!
i guess bluntness can be a good thing, but it's another thing if you're also wrong 
To OP: As my friend said, you'll always find people progressing faster than you. You'll always find people progressing slower than you. I see people whose progression is faster than mine (say, 1500 in 7 months for instance, that's a friend of mine). That's cool for them, I'm happy for them. As has been said before, no need to compare. What's more important is if you enjoy it.
--
More importantly, ~1000 is a significant amount of understanding compared to a pure beginner. I would still call it still upper-beginner, but I also recognize that you are starting to sincerely understand things about chess: opening principles, castling, counting, basic tactics. Your games are starting to be tactically interesting. So, I hope you are genuinely proud of the progress that you have made. I consider players of your level to be players who have shown nontrivial interest in chess 
--
There are people on the forums who like to disparage upper-beginner/low-intermediate players; ignore them. It's their problem, probably an ego thing on their part. More importantly, reasonable good players DO recognize that 1000s have nontrivial chess understanding.
Here is a screenshot from my friend llama; he's around 2000 otb.
I understand both sentiments. For people who don't hang pieces much, beginner-level play looks like inexplicable chaos. However, players at your rating are, in my mind, genuinely decent players.
What is the best opening for a beginner?
To OP: As my friend said, you'll always find people progressing faster than you. You'll always find people progressing slower than you. I see people whose progression is faster than mine (say, 1500 in 7 months for instance, that's a friend of mine). That's cool for them, I'm happy for them. As has been said before, no need to compare. What's more important is if you enjoy it.
--
More importantly, ~1000 is a significant amount of understanding compared to a pure beginner. I would still call it still upper-beginner, but I also recognize that you are starting to sincerely understand things about chess: opening principles, castling, counting, basic tactics. Your games are starting to be tactically interesting. So, I hope you are genuinely proud of the progress that you have made. I consider players of your level to be players who have shown nontrivial interest in chess
--
There are people on the forums who like to disparage upper-beginner/low-intermediate players; ignore them. It's their problem, probably an ego thing on their part. More importantly, reasonable good players DO recognize that 1000s have nontrivial chess understanding.
Here is a screenshot from my friend llama; he's around 2000 otb.
I understand both sentiments. For people who don't hang pieces much, beginner-level play looks like inexplicable chaos. However, players at your rating are, in my mind, genuinely decent players.
When I said bluntly, it was more of an understatement, considering how the discussion was going, the follow up you provided was similar to how I think about it, it doesn't seem reasonable that someone who has diligently learned even basic stuff, opening principles, etc. not having improved to some level.
Despite that, I don't necessarily think the thought process was wrong, per se. Unless I misunderstood, different perspectives, but considering your response was so immaculate, I don't think I have anything useful to add.
@cogadhtintreach
If somebody like you is one of the best players in your country at the age of 14 it's shame for that county.
No need to insult him or his country, I don't understand the animosity...
I have nothing personal against this guy. I'm only saying the truth. If he'd play OTB right now he'd have close to zero chances to stay above 1500 FIDE.
And if such play is top player in whole country... it's only says how weak chess plaeyers are in that country.
keep telling yourself that Im not 1500 FIDE
@cogadhtintreach
If somebody like you is one of the best players in your country at the age of 14 it's shame for that county.
No need to insult him or his country, I don't understand the animosity...
I have nothing personal against this guy. I'm only saying the truth. If he'd play OTB right now he'd have close to zero chances to stay above 1500 FIDE.
And if such play is top player in whole country... it's only says how weak chess plaeyers are in that country.
keep telling yourself that Im not 1500 FIDE
Kid!
I don't even care! There are many-many thousands of noobs like you. You're just another noob in the line. BYE!
ok buddy
@cogadhtintreach
I've seen many noobs like you. They always say that they are only xteen and they will be GMs very soon . And, almost always they can't even break 2000 at blitz.
You're NOT 1900. You're 1500 at best! And most likely even lower than that. Chess.com rapid ratings on lower levels are VERY-VERY inflated.
I never said that blitz is "real chess". Of course you should play longer time controls if you want to improve. But blitz ratings a better to estimate skill of a player. Blitz ratings are closer to reality.
If you think I'm dumping your "real level" then try to play a few OTB tournaments and you'll see that even 1500 is exaggeration.
I took the time there just to clear stuff up, but I wont be responding anymore cos there is a 99.9% chance that u are just trolling.
Haha, think this was a p good assessment.
@cogadhtintreach
If somebody like you is one of the best players in your country at the age of 14 it's shame for that county.
No need to insult him or his country, I don't understand the animosity...
I have nothing personal against this guy. I'm only saying the truth. If he'd play OTB right now he'd have close to zero chances to stay above 1500 FIDE.
And if such play is top player in whole country... it's only says how weak chess plaeyers are in that country.
keep telling yourself that Im not 1500 FIDE
I'm gonna guess you aren't, bc you are higher 
Qual melhor abertura para iniciantes???
Eu diria que a Defesa Escandinava e a melhor abertura para aprender para iniciantes. Nao tem muitas linhas e, se jogado corretamente, pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa contra seu oponente.
I would say Scandinavian Defense is the best opening to learn for beginners. It doesn't have many lines, and if played correctly, it can be a powerful tool against your opponent.
Tente jogar essas linhas escandinavas.
Try to play these Scandinavian lines.
But if you want a fair answer then... your "progress" doesn't exist.
I am curious, you're a much better player than I am, what would a year of progress look like in your eyes, a reasonable amount, average progress for someone after a year? Genuinely interested in perspective from a high rated player.
In my eyes normal progress is when you reach 1500-1700 in one year from scratch.
It's ridiculous to claim that gaining 800 rating points from a 100 rating to a 900 rating is non-existing "progress". There is no definition of the word progress that would exclude this progress from being progress. EvilOverMind doesn't know the meaning of the word progress. Or he does know what progress means, but chooses to apply his own definitions instead. Whatever the motivation, it's pretty insulting to dismiss a player's progress like that and not very constructive. The weirdest part is that he claims that his contribution to this topic is a fair answer. It seems he also doesn't know the meaning of the word fair.
The follow-up statement is just as unfounded. Even if it were true that reaching 1500-1700 from scratch in single year was normal progress that still wouldn't make it right to dismiss all progress less than that as non-existent. But it's not true. It doesn't even make sense. If it was normal to reach the top 4% of players in about a year, it would be normal to see players achieve this. While it's definitely doable to reach that goal, far too few players are managing to do so to call it normal. It seems that EvilOverMind also does not know the meaning of the word normal.
But if you want a fair answer then... your "progress" doesn't exist.
I am curious, you're a much better player than I am, what would a year of progress look like in your eyes, a reasonable amount, average progress for someone after a year? Genuinely interested in perspective from a high rated player.
In my eyes normal progress is when you reach 1500-1700 in one year from scratch.
It's ridiculous to claim that gaining 800 rating points from a 100 rating to a 900 rating is non-existing "progress". There is no definition of the word progress that would exclude this progress from being progress. EvilOverMind doesn't know the meaning of the word progress. Or he does know what progress means, but chooses to apply his own definitions instead. Whatever the motivation, it's pretty insulting to dismiss a player's progress like that and not very constructive. The weirdest part is that he claims that his contribution to this topic is a fair answer. It seems he also doesn't know the meaning of the word fair.
The follow-up statement is just as unfounded. Even if it were true that reaching 1500-1700 from scratch in single year was normal progress that still wouldn't make it right to dismiss all progress less than that as non-existent. But it's not true. It doesn't even make sense. If it was normal to reach the top 4% of players in about a year, it would be normal to see players achieve this. While it's definitely doable to reach that goal, far too few players are managing to do so to call it normal. It seems that EvilOverMind also does not know the meaning of the word normal.
@paper_llama noted that Sartre noted the following about anti-Semites that applies to so many people today:
ive been stuck at 1100 for years so
If you ever want to play some casual games I'm down. Stuck how so? Do you just play casually? Coaching, and studying hard is what I'm leaning towards being somewhat new. I think I'd only be frustrated if I was focused and actively trying to push my understanding of the game.